跳到正文
arXiv cs.CL· Zhenwei Tang, Jintao Liu, Di Bai, Xidong Wu, Xinwu Cheng·· 12 小时前AI 评分32

ReRankID:仅用 Semantic ID 作为物品表示的推理重排序

Reasoning Reranking with Semantic IDs as the Sole Item Representation

AI 导读

研究构建 ReRankID 测试台,让模型仅凭 Semantic ID(SID)对候选列表进行推理与重排序,发现模型常直接复制输入顺序而非真正重排,可读元数据也无法修复该问题。

正文 · 原文

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Reasoning rerankers write a rationale before ranking a candidate slate, and existing systems read item metadata to do so, even though generative recommenders increasingly represent items as compact Semantic IDs (SIDs). Ranking from SIDs alone has two appeals: SID prompts are far shorter than the matched item text, and although item codes are fixed from content, the backbone learns their token embeddings in part from user-item interaction sequences, so the tokens can carry behavioral signal that item text lacks. That training targets next-item generation, and whether it supports ranking a supplied slate from SIDs alone is untested. We build ReRankID, a controlled testbed in which models reason and rank from a history and slate shown only as SIDs, varying item rendering, history length, and slate size one at a time. On this testbed, such models often copy the input order instead of reranking, and readable metadata does not repair the failure. We compare supervised fine-tuning, rejection-sampled self-training, on-policy distillation, and verifier-based reinforcement learning as post-training methods and find that they elicit the missing behavior. The strongest post-trained model, the 8B model trained with a graded ranking reward, gives the best SID-only ranking and matches strong text-reading LLMs whose prompts are about 20x longer. It ranks above random with no history at all, where a caption-reading reference does not, and it keeps its gains at long histories, where text prompts pass 50k tokens and the caption-reading reference stops improving. In a paired rationale audit, this model argues trade-offs better than that reference but describes items less accurately. The common post-training methods we test thus elicit ranking from SIDs but not faithful item descriptions, which calls for post-training that improves the reasoning itself, not only the ranking it produces.
Comments: 30 pages, 3 figures. Code: this https URL ; data: this https URL
Subjects: Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2610.22797 [cs.IR]
  (or arXiv:2610.22797v1 [cs.IR] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.22797

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Zhenwei Tang [view email]
[v1] Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:21:47 UTC (1,157 KB)

来源:arXiv cs.CL · arxiv.org